Fukushima monkeys show possible effects of radiation, study says

“I think it much more likely that the apparently low blood cell counts in the Fukushima monkeys are caused by something other than radiation.”

Geraldine Thomas, a professor of molecular pathology at Imperial College London, added the radiation doses would have been less than a person would receive on a flight from London to Tokyo.

The blood cell count may be caused by other factors such as a new diet or other environmental changes brought on by the tsunami, she said.

OH puhleeeze ! . . . . . The obfuscation continues ! . . . . .And these people are scientists ????????????.. ALL ENVIRONMENTAL factors In the Fukushima area were contaminated by radiation . . . .So EVERYTHING those monkeys were exposed to for over 3 years - air,water, food sources - were /are contaminated.

Jim Smith, environmental science professor at the University of Portsmouth in Britain, said the dosage inferred in the study was unlikely to have had a significant effect on the monkeys’ blood cell count.

So basically, this entire piece is speculation?

A Japanese research team wrote in the journal Nature Scientific Reports that although they could not prove the link, the blood levels “might likely be the result of exposure to some form of radioactive material”.

And none-Japanese scientists are disputing.

I trust Japanese researchers as Japanese researchers have all sort of data from Hiroshima and Nagasaki patients written in Japanese language.

Shimokita monkey live in a very different environment from those in Fukushima City, so it is hard to see how the researchers can be so positive in making a link to radiation exposure. Also, looking at their paper, despite the fact that they have been studying these monkeys for year, they don't have blood cell information from before the accident.

So essentially Fukushima is as safe to live as London. So there is no danger of radiation? Who is paying the salary of these interviewed professors? How goes the expression, if one continues the disinformation long enough the disinformation becomes fact.

Some group are seeking the result of radioation disaster desperately. Any data are interpretated to beneficial for them. Lol

No surprise that Professor Thomas diminishes the risk of radiation exposure:

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/apr/26/obesity-smoking-more-dangerous-radiation

I do hope that this research team has the testicular fortitude to bring their research to a stronger conclusion.

Let's face it anyone who dares to tell it like it is, and say "Fukushima radiation is dangeous for humans not just in Fukushima, but also at some distance from the event, and data from these monkeys show how much it affects the systems of primates", is going to be ridiculed and discredited. Remember all the accusations of "hysteria" back in 2011? Flyjin?

Radiation from a flight and that from a meltdown cannot be compared. But this scientist knows that. Just toeing the party line, so more nuke plants can be brought back online and built world wide. I know the UK want to build another one.

All the world's governments want people to do is keep on drinking the koolaid and live short miserable lives, making the one percent richer and richer.

Fukushima monkeys show possible effects of radiation

Are the talking about the workers at the plant? Sorry!

Sarcasm button hit: Now, now people do not forget we are dealing with Japanese radiation which is uniquely unique to Japan and is therefore special and different from any other radiation. Only the Japanese can understand it.

I think this is the article Educator60 bookmarked -

http://www.nature.com/srep/2014/140724/srep05793/full/srep05793.html#results

So, they killed nearly 100 monkeys in order to come up with a list of maybes and might bes?

Do these so-called scientists have nothing better to spend their time on? Was this just a grant-gathering exercise?

Was this just a grant-gathering exercise?

YES.

To make their hypothesis more valid they need to compare the Fukushima monkey's blood levels with those from years before the disaster, not with another family of monkeys in a different environment. It would make more sense to look at past data from the same monkeys, if they have it.

1,000 monkeys, not 100

Ten times worse. :(

70km is not short. it is right to compare the dosage to a commercial flight. I doubt the results or the explanation of the japanese researchers

The whole article is speculation. They found some correlation, but have not proved causation in any way. The whole thing looks like someone grasping for straws, trying to "prove" a pre-conceived idea. Very much the way conspiracy theorists work.

I trust Japanese researchers as Japanese researchers have all sort of data from Hiroshima and Nagasaki patients written in Japanese language.

Guess what? Non-Japanese researchers have the same data and this data would have nothing to do with this study.

Radiation from a flight and that from a meltdown cannot be compared.

Yes, they can.

This study had no data from before the tsunami. For all they know the Fukushima monkeys have always had lower WBC and RBC counts.

There's no causative link proven, yet some are accepting this as fact? Sounds like unverified speculation to me.

Fewer? By how much? 1%? 15% 30%? And compared to the baseline of such species? Are we out of the baseline? In the minimum range? Higher than the average?

If monkeys are affected, I'm pretty sure humans are too.

Abe needs to take the plant situation seriously. He and his family should move to Fukushima to "prove" to the nation that he really feels it's safe up there. I bet he won't do it.

There's some evidence pointing toward the possibility of a connection, yet some are not willing to see it as a possibility?

Of course it's a possibility! But lots of things are possibilities. Zichi mentioned there is a baseline study from 1967 - that's a LONG time ago and a whole lot has changed environmentally.

Just remember that a single study - even if conducted well - is simply another component of building scientific understanding. More study is required, certainly if there is any causative link to be proven.

The obfuscation continues ! . . . . .And these people are scientists ?

And you are?

Of course it's a possibility! But lots of things are possibilities. Zichi mentioned there is a baseline study from 1967 - that's a LONG time ago and a whole lot has changed environmentally.

And also that study only included monkeys from Western Japan. Thus it is not a baseline study when trying to compare it to monkeys from Eastern Japan.